Flüeler U R, Elhatton K M, Guyton D L
Johns Hopkins University Hospital, Baltimore, USA.
Klin Monbl Augenheilkd. 1996 May;208(5):343-7. doi: 10.1055/s-2008-1035233.
Calibration and positioning of prism bars is not well standardized. When both the horizontal and vertical prism bars are used, they are frequently held back-to-back in front of one eye; the prism bar then reversed from its usual position will give an erroneous measurement.
We used an optical bench to investigate calibration and errors from improper positioning of prism bars manufactured by the companies R. O. Gulden and Luneau. We also urged Gulden to redesign its prism bars so that they can be held back-to-back and slid vertically with respect to one another, held in alignment by grooves along the edges of the flat surfaces of the bars. The combination horizontal/vertical prism bar thus created demands that the horizontal prism bar be calibrated precisely in the frontal plane position, and the new vertical prism bar be calibrated in the Prentice position.
Gulden's new combination horizontal/vertical prism bar can be used without significant error (measured deviations within +/- 0.5 delta of labelled values). Gulden's old vertical prism bar has always been calibrated in the Prentice position (a surprise to the company). Luneau's horizontal and vertical prism bars are both calibrated close to the frontal plane position (within +/- 0.4 delta). Improper positioning demonstrated an increasing error with larger prisms. Luneau's 25 delta segment measured in the Prentice position 27.8 delta and the 40 delta segment 67.5 delta; the 25 delta segment of Gulden's old and new vertical prism bars measured 23.2 delta in the frontal plane position.
Gulden's vertical prism bars, calibrated in the Prentice position, whether used in combination with the horizontal prism bar or by themselves, should always be held with the flat surface toward the examiner. Luneau's horizontal and vertical prism bars should be held one in front of each eye when used simultaneously. As a consequence, neither eye is looking directly at the fixation object, and strictly defining primary and secondary deviations is not possible.
棱镜条的校准和定位尚未得到很好的标准化。当同时使用水平和垂直棱镜条时,它们经常背靠背地放在一只眼前;然后棱镜条从其通常位置反转会给出错误的测量结果。
我们使用光学平台来研究R.O. Gulden和Luneau公司生产的棱镜条的校准以及因不当定位而产生的误差。我们还敦促Gulden重新设计其棱镜条,以便它们可以背靠背放置并相对于彼此垂直滑动,通过沿条的平面边缘的凹槽保持对齐。由此产生的水平/垂直组合棱镜条要求水平棱镜条在额平面位置精确校准,新的垂直棱镜条在普伦蒂斯位置校准。
Gulden的新型水平/垂直组合棱镜条可以无明显误差地使用(测量偏差在标记值的+/- 0.5棱镜度范围内)。Gulden的旧垂直棱镜条一直是在普伦蒂斯位置校准的(这让该公司感到惊讶)。Luneau的水平和垂直棱镜条都在接近额平面位置校准(在+/- 0.4棱镜度范围内)。不当定位显示,棱镜越大误差越大。Luneau的25棱镜度段在普伦蒂斯位置测量为27.8棱镜度,40棱镜度段为67.5棱镜度;Gulden旧的和新的垂直棱镜条的25棱镜度段在额平面位置测量为23.2棱镜度。
Gulden的垂直棱镜条在普伦蒂斯位置校准,无论是与水平棱镜条组合使用还是单独使用,都应始终将平面朝向检查者。Luneau的水平和垂直棱镜条同时使用时应一只放在每只眼前。因此,两只眼睛都不会直接看向注视物体,并且不可能严格定义原发性和继发性偏差。